148 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

"Streamline" is a misused buzzword by developers these days, as are terms like "broadening appeal" and "more accessible" and the like. They use these words as a substitute for "dumbing down" and "pandering to the mainstream" basically.

About the ONLY thing DA2 did better was the skills system being more branching than the straight-line we got in DA:O (and even then it was too often just a diamond that forced us to take both major skills to get the final common one anyway). That's it! NOTHING else was improved from DA:O to DA2 (unless you want to get petty and say small cosmetic things like the CC having more options and "moving hair" that didn't look so plastic, etc.). The rest was just dumbed-down, oversimplified pap with too much focus on fast, action-based combat and cinematics.

BioWare's not going to give us a decent RPG any more, and anybody who is still here expecting that from Inquistion is wasting their time. If you want a proper RPG, then look to something like like this.

Modifié par Terror_K, 26 septembre 2012 - 04:41 .

[Rawgrim]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Which old school form of rpg? Are you talking about Temple of Apshai, Telengard, Legends of the Lost, Wizardry, Bard's tale, Alternate Reality, temple of Elemental Evil?

Shall we go back to turn-based combat? Shall we have weight requirements? Food and Water Requirements? Weather conditions that can cause freezing death or heatstroke because the character is wearing heavy armor.
What do you mean by old school?.

I don`t think any rpgs for PC had weather conditions as a factor. the ultima games had food requirements though. That was actually abit fun, since you could actually bake bread or a cake yourself in some of them.

Not all the oldschool rpgs had turn-based combat either.

Actually having arrows for your bow, shouldn`t be too much to ask. Or of you don`t have a weapon equipped, you should fight unarmed. in DA2 the game magically gives you a sword instead. thats lame.Its like the game is helping me out. Making sure i can`t possibly screw anything up, no matter how dumb I am when playing the game.

[labargegrrrl]

Andrastee wrote...

I just want you guys to go back to the old school form of rpg .

Which old school are we talking about, here? DAO? Knights of the Old Republic? Baldur's Gate? The BG games were actually streamlined and simplified compared to older CRPGs. (I started with Blade of Destiny. In my day, we had to walk to our adventures up hill in the snow. And if we didn't bring snowshoes, winter coats and at least two blankets our characters would catch the flu and die.)

i remember games where i died of dysentary...is that old school enough? 

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Vandicus wrote...

marktcameron wrote...

I just want you guys to go back to the old school form of rpg .

That would be D&D 1 and 2 then?

3e and beyond is post 2000.

Yes D&D 1 and 2 would be fine. It's the time when the gamemasters think roleplaying is about you, the player, embarking your journey in the world they created. Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

BioWare after Neverwinter Nights, however think it's about them telling their story while you only eat popcorn behind director's chair instead of truly assuming the role a character in a story - more or less JRPG way. Even then they pack their game with tons of lies ( illusion of useless choices ) and railroading plot just to make you believe you're making an impact on their story which is getting too annoying ( as seen in ME 3 and DA 2 ). And now they're thinking to take over your character in their next installment just for them to play their "Song of Ice and Fire's" card. They have no respect for player choices and character. They only care for their story and their own character. Not Player's Character and/or Player's story. They're just story developer. Not RPG developer. Not anymore.

I have very low expectation for BioWare when it comes to RPG but I'll see how it goes with DA 3 first before lumping BioWare as another fail RPG developer in my list.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 26 septembre 2012 - 07:30 .

[KotorEffect3]

Tommyspa wrote...

Get off my lawn!

lol

[PaulSX]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

come on, Bethesda's games right now are all about make-believe and false freedom. In skyrim, I ended up with over a million gold but I had nothing to buy because I made better stuff than those crap in the stores and in the mean while, I can kill a dragon in a few hits. The girl will marry me if I chopped some wood for her. Even Oblivion is miles better than that hollow and fake world. the game is fun in the sense of exploration but there is no your story to tell when there is no proper RPG mechanics involved.

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

For all those bioware haters out there...if you hate them so much and are done with them, then why are you posting on these forums?

[hoorayforicecream]

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

For all those bioware haters out there...if you hate them so much and are done with them, then why are you posting on these forums?

Jilted lover syndrome.

[Justin2k]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

Bethesda are more guilty of streamlining and accessibility than most.

In Morrowind, if you were a thief, you were a thief.  You would need suitable thief skills to join the thieves guild.  You would have a thieves guild quest to steal from the mages guild which would ban your character from ever joining the mages guild.  And to become the master thief, you would need to steal the biggest haul of all.  Your stealthy thief guild master could easily transfer to the Dark Brotherhood but try taking him to the fighters guild, and he'd be stuck killing rats.

In Skyrim you can be the archmage using one magic spell one time (on entry).  You can lead the companions as a stealthy thief or a mage.  In Morrowind, you just couldn't do that.  Which meant your characters were unique, the world seemed so much bigger.  You couldn't beat the orc in one on one competition unless you too were a strong knight with sword and shield.  You couldn't tell the difference between certain mage ingredients unless you were a suitable alchemist.  People would come up with very very specific builds and styles.  I remember having a pilgrim who's sole purpose was to travel and beat people with my staff.   That doesnt happen in Skyrim.  Bethesda felt it was wrong to make people play through more than once to experience all content so now it's not realistic at all.  Yes, you may start out as a mage, thief or whomever, but you end up as an unstoppable killing machine skilled at everything.

Almost all Skyrim characters are head of mages, db, thieves, companions, maxed out in destruction, restoration, one handed/two handed, archery and sneak as well as being insanely rich and 90% decked out in Daedric or Dragon armor with daedric artifacts.  You have the option to run around in cloth clothing and chop wood all day while pretending to be a lowly woodsmith, but who really does it?  Almost everyone played Skyrim exactly the same way, just in a different order.

Skyrim and Oblivion before it were hugely streamlined.  Level 70 dungeons were accessible from level 1 in Morrowind, you would die upon fighting, but if you could run in and steal some loot, you'd be rich for the rest of the game.  Now everythings the same level as you, loot, enemies, armor....  It's the ultimate dumbing down of their "  open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character".  Sold a lot more copies this way though.  

Modifié par Justin2k, 26 septembre 2012 - 09:41 .

[DarkKnightHolmes]

*Waits for Bioware to say "This is the best place to start"*

[Sacred_Fantasy]

suntzuxi wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

come on, Bethesda's games right now are all about make-believe and false freedom. In skyrim, I ended up with over a million gold but I had nothing to buy because I made better stuff than those crap in the stores and in the mean while, I can kill a dragon in a few hits. The girl will marry me if I chopped some wood for her. Even Oblivion is miles better than that hollow and fake world.

Why do you want to waste your time gathering over million gold when you can create better equipment and the cost of marrige is only few golds, in the first place? It's your own decison. I never even bother to gather gold more than what I needed.  

suntzuxi wrote...

the game is fun in the sense of exploration but there is no your story to tell when there is no proper RPG mechanics involved.

No. Making your own story and journey your own adventure is proper RPG mechanics. If you don't know how then it obviously you can only play story driven RPG. Learn how to be creative and be independant from being spoonfeeded by official story first before you venture into open world.

[Morroian]

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

For all those bioware haters out there...if you hate them so much and are done with them, then why are you posting on these forums?

yep I wonder the same thing.

[marshalleck]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

For all those bioware haters out there...if you hate them so much and are done with them, then why are you posting on these forums?

Jilted lover syndrome.

No, it's more like Schadenfreude.

[Vandicus]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

marktcameron wrote...

I just want you guys to go back to the old school form of rpg .

That would be D&D 1 and 2 then?

3e and beyond is post 2000.

Yes D&D 1 and 2 would be fine. It's the time when the gamemasters think roleplaying is about you, the player, embarking your journey in the world they created. Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

BioWare after Neverwinter Nights, however think it's about them telling their story while you only eat popcorn behind director's chair instead of truly assuming the role a character in a story - more or less JRPG way. Even then they pack their game with tons of lies ( illusion of useless choices ) and railroading plot just to make you believe you're making an impact on their story which is getting too annoying ( as seen in ME 3 and DA 2 ). And now they're thinking to take over your character in their next installment just for them to play their "Song of Ice and Fire's" card. They have no respect for player choices and character. They only care for their story and their own character. Not Player's Character and/or Player's story. They're just story developer. Not RPG developer. Not anymore.

I have very low expectation for BioWare when it comes to RPG but I'll see how it goes with DA 3 first before lumping BioWare as another fail RPG developer in my list.

A. The complexity of the system does not have a direct correlation to how deep it is. THACO, percentile strength, lots of the things that were streamlined into 3rd edition had no effect on depth. The small amount of depth that was lost from 2nd to 3rd was largely the monster specific fluff that had become crunch. Not related to streamlining the system at all.
B. Illusion of choice is the only choice you'll ever have in an rpg. JRPG does not attempt to manufacture illusion of choice, WRPG does.
C. You don't actually make meaningful choices in a sandbox rpg. Sandbox rpgs give you a system to play in, but its just the crpg system minus plot and story. Now some people enjoy playing singleplayer entirely internally roleplayed characters, but internal roleplaying is not a facet of PnP. PnP roleplaying is external.

[Morroian]

Terror_K wrote...

It saddens (and even sickens) me that there are so many people supporting BioWare and Dragon Age 3 in these forums considering how they've treated the fanbase over the last few years and the way they pretty much murdered the Dragon Age IP with the second "game" in the series. They'll never learn so long as people keep throwing money at them and don't have enough integrity to walk away when they should.

So your contention is that people who liked DA2 and actually did manage to get a good role playing experience out of it are just fooling themselves and are blinded by what...fanboyism and have no integrity? Get a grip.

[Morroian]

Justin2k wrote...

Bethesda are more guilty of streamlining and accessibility than most.

In Morrowind, if you were a thief, you were a thief.  You would need suitable thief skills to join the thieves guild.  You would have a thieves guild quest to steal from the mages guild which would ban your character from ever joining the mages guild.  And to become the master thief, you would need to steal the biggest haul of all.  Your stealthy thief guild master could easily transfer to the Dark Brotherhood but try taking him to the fighters guild, and he'd be stuck killing rats.

In Skyrim you can be the archmage using one magic spell one time (on entry).  You can lead the companions as a stealthy thief or a mage.  In Morrowind, you just couldn't do that. 

 
Or is Bethesda leaving it up to the player to put those limits on themselves. If you want to be a thief play as one and ignore the College of Winterhold. The fact is that most people don't have the self control to restrict themselves like that.

Justin2k wrote...

Skyrim and Oblivion before it were hugely streamlined.  Level 70 dungeons were accessible from level 1 in Morrowind, you would die upon fighting, but if you could run in and steal some loot, you'd be rich for the rest of the game.  Now everythings the same level as you, loot, enemies, armor....  It's the ultimate dumbing down of their "  open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character".  Sold a lot more copies this way though.  

Actually Skyrim is an example of streamlining well without dumbing down. You can build completely differe2nt characters within its system. You don't need to be able to manipulate stats to do that.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Justin2k wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Bethesda still adopt this mindset in open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character.

Bethesda are more guilty of streamlining and accessibility than most.

In Morrowind, if you were a thief, you were a thief.  You would need suitable thief skills to join the thieves guild.  You would have a thieves guild quest to steal from the mages guild which would ban your character from ever joining the mages guild.  And to become the master thief, you would need to steal the biggest haul of all.  Your stealthy thief guild master could easily transfer to the Dark Brotherhood but try taking him to the fighters guild, and he'd be stuck killing rats.

In Skyrim you can be the archmage using one magic spell one time (on entry).  You can lead the companions as a stealthy thief or a mage.

It's your choice. No one force you to be jack-of-all-trade. You can restrict yourself if you want to. I played many characters who are purely warrior and archer - because I never like throwing spell and spend mana. They're all as unique as my warden in DAO. 

Justin2k wrote...

 In Morrowind, you just couldn't do that.  Which meant your characters were unique, the world seemed so much bigger.  You couldn't beat the orc in one on one competition unless you too were a strong knight with sword and shield.  You couldn't tell the difference between certain mage ingredients unless you were a suitable alchemist.  People would come up with very very specific builds and styles.  I remember having a pilgrim who's sole purpose was to travel and beat people with my staff.

Morrowind restricted your options. I don't believe in any restriction to make a better RPG. 

Justin2k wrote...


That doesnt happen in Skyrim.  Bethesda felt it was wrong to make people play through more than once to experience all content so now it's not realistic at all.  Yes, you may start out as a mage, thief or whomever, but you end up as an unstoppable killing machine skilled at everything.

Skyrim trust you enough to use your own freedom to make better judgement of what you want to do instead of trying to force you into something you dislike with unnessary restrictions. You know why we impose so much restrictions on children? That because children are not mature enough to evaluate proper decisions. I trust you're mature enough to decide what, how and why you do anything in Skyrim without developers holding your hand with tons of restrictions? 
.   

Justin2k wrote...



Almost all Skyrim characters are head of mages, db, thieves, companions, maxed out in destruction, restoration, one handed/two handed, archery and sneak as well as being insanely rich and 90% decked out in Daedric or Dragon armor with daedric artifacts.  You have the option to run around in cloth clothing and chop wood all day while pretending to be a lowly woodsmith, but who really does it?  Almost everyone played Skyrim exactly the same way, just in a different order.

That because you choose to do so. No one force you. Just because the options are all there, doesn't mean you have to play them all if you dont like them. Geez, do you really need to be railroaded all the way just to play your character? Learn how to control yourself. It's not  Sykrim's fault for providing all the options. It's your own fault for choosing the way you play the game.

Justin2k wrote...

Skyrim and Oblivion before it were hugely streamlined.  Level 70 dungeons were accessible from level 1 in Morrowind, you would die upon fighting, but if you could run in and steal some loot, you'd be rich for the rest of the game.  Now everythings the same level as you, loot, enemies, armor....  It's the ultimate dumbing down of their "  open world environment where you're given much freedom to be what you want, do what you will and live your character".

  No it isn't. It's ultimately provide every access to play the game in anyway role you like. If you don't know how then it;s your own fault. 

Justin2k wrote...


Sold a lot more copies this way though.  

It sold more because RPG-ers appreciated the freedom to make their own choices without being spoonfeed by useless linear plot and annoying preset characters who autoplay by themselves,  that constantly plague story driven RPG like BioWare games.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 27 septembre 2012 - 01:21 .

[AlienWolf728]

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

The old school RPGs suck....
Request denied.

^ must be 8-14 years old.

[Terror_K]

Morroian wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It saddens (and even sickens) me that there are so many people supporting BioWare and Dragon Age 3 in these forums considering how they've treated the fanbase over the last few years and the way they pretty much murdered the Dragon Age IP with the second "game" in the series. They'll never learn so long as people keep throwing money at them and don't have enough integrity to walk away when they should.

So your contention is that people who liked DA2 and actually did manage to get a good role playing experience out of it are just fooling themselves and are blinded by what...fanboyism and have no integrity? Get a grip.

DA2 was pretty much a reboot that spat on everything the IP previously stood for and was created to be. I don't see how anybody can be a fan of DA2 and be a fan of what Dragon Age was originally supposed to be. And I don't see how anybody can support BioWare after they intentionally ruined it like they did. If DA2 was merely riddled with mistakes I could see it, but it was bad because BioWare deliberately dumbed it down and strayed away from the original source material just to broaden appeal and pander to the mainstream.

That's unforgivable, IMO: to spend 7-8 years setting up this series to be the great new hope for true RPG fans and then immediately wrench the carpet out from under their feet with the very next game. It's beyond despicable.

[Emzamination]

AlienWolf728 wrote...

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

The old school RPGs suck....
Request denied.

^ must be 8-14 years old.

No, she's completely in the right.

[Atakuma]

Terror_K wrote...
That's unforgivable, IMO: to spend 7-8 years setting up this series to be the great new hope for true RPG fans and then immediately wrench the carpet out from under their feet with the very next game. It's beyond despicable.

It's not even remotely dispicable, you are simply being overdramatic.

[Morroian]

Atakuma wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
That's unforgivable, IMO: to spend 7-8 years setting up this series to be the great new hope for true RPG fans and then immediately wrench the carpet out from under their feet with the very next game. It's beyond despicable.

It's not even remotely dispicable, you are simply being overdramatic.

This, so much this.

[Emzamination]

Terror_K wrote...

"Streamline" is a misused buzzword by developers these days, as are terms like "broadening appeal" and "more accessible" and the like. They use these words as a substitute for "dumbing down" and "pandering to the mainstream" basically.

About the ONLY thing DA2 did better was the skills system being more branching than the straight-line we got in DA:O (and even then it was too often just a diamond that forced us to take both major skills to get the final common one anyway). That's it! NOTHING else was improved from DA:O to DA2 (unless you want to get petty and say small cosmetic things like the CC having more options and "moving hair" that didn't look so plastic, etc.). The rest was just dumbed-down, oversimplified pap with too much focus on fast, action-based combat and cinematics.

BioWare's not going to give us a decent RPG any more, and anybody who is still here expecting that from Inquistion is wasting their time. If you want a proper RPG, then look to something like like this.

Obsidian has their own forums too... Just sayin

[Mr.House]

Terror_K wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It saddens (and even sickens) me that there are so many people supporting BioWare and Dragon Age 3 in these forums considering how they've treated the fanbase over the last few years and the way they pretty much murdered the Dragon Age IP with the second "game" in the series. They'll never learn so long as people keep throwing money at them and don't have enough integrity to walk away when they should.

So your contention is that people who liked DA2 and actually did manage to get a good role playing experience out of it are just fooling themselves and are blinded by what...fanboyism and have no integrity? Get a grip.

DA2 was pretty much a reboot that spat on everything the IP previously stood for and was created to be. I don't see how anybody can be a fan of DA2 and be a fan of what Dragon Age was originally supposed to be. And I don't see how anybody can support BioWare after they intentionally ruined it like they did. If DA2 was merely riddled with mistakes I could see it, but it was bad because BioWare deliberately dumbed it down and strayed away from the original source material just to broaden appeal and pander to the mainstream.

That's unforgivable, IMO: to spend 7-8 years setting up this series to be the great new hope for true RPG fans and then immediately wrench the carpet out from under their feet with the very next game. It's beyond despicable.

Thanks for the laugh terror.